University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering

CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

CE 521G FORM-1:
Undergraduate Research Paper Template
Endorsement Sheet

Department of Term/Academic Year:

Civil Engineering Second Semester AY 2019-2020
Talamban, Cebu City,
Philippines 6000

Research Paper Endorsement and Approval

I/we have read and agreed to the findings contained in the research manuscript entitled

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF COAL FLY ASH AS PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF

CEMENT WITH 20% PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF COCONUT SHELLS AS COARSE
AGGREGATES

Prepared and submitted by

BEJOC, BRYAN A.

BUCSIT, JOHN MARK T.

ORTIZ, DYÑEL FLOR D.

I/we affirm that the same complies with the standards prescribed for the research paper requirement.

In view thereof, I/we hereby endorses the said research paper for review and oral defense.

Endorsed By:

Engr. Imadyl Cayanong - Damuag

Name and Signature of Adviser Date Endorsed

Name and Signature of Co-Adviser Date Endorsed

University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

CE 521G FORM-1:
Undergraduate Research Paper Template
Approval Sheet

Term/Academic Year:
Department of
Civil Engineering Second Semester AY 2019-2020
Talamban, Cebu City,
Philippines 6000

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF COAL FLY ASH AS PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF

CEMENT WITH 20% PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF COCONUT SHELLS AS COARSE
AGGREGATES

REVIEW

Name and Signature of Reviewer Name and Signature of Reviewer

Name and Signature of Reviewer Name and Signature of Reviewer

Date of Review

APPROVAL

Engr. Janice B. Jamora

Name and Signature of Primary Reviewer Date Approved

Engr. Aida O. Lebunfacil

Name and Signature of Primary Reviewer Date Approved

Engr. Joey Cyndell T. Atillo

Name and Signature of Primary Reviewer Date Approved
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

USC Civil Engineering Student

Research Annual 2020
Volume X, xx-xx
Department of
Civil Engineering
Talamban, Cebu City, Research Group
Philippines 6000

A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF COAL FLY ASH AS PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF

CEMENT WITH 20% PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF COCONUT SHELLS AS COARSE
AGGREGATES

Bejoc, B.a, Bucsit, J.M.a, Ortiz, D.F.a, Damuag, I.a,*

a
Department of Civil Engineering, University of San Carlos, Talamban, Cebu City 6000, Philippines
*Corresponding author: Telefax +63 32 230 0100, Email: [email protected]

1 Abstract
2 Cement and gravel have been the most widely used construction materials around the world. Both by-products are not
3 renewable construction materials and the continuous production and extensive extraction of these will eventually lead to
4 depletion. Several researchers have already considered industrial and agricultural wastes as effective substitutions for the
5 aforementioned materials. Among these are the coal fly ash and coconut shells. This study focuses on the possibility of
6 partially replacing gravel and cement with coconut shells and coal fly ash, respectively, by examining its effects on
7 workability, density, and 220th – day compressive strength. A total of six concrete mixes were made for this research i.e.
8 the control mix, mixes with 10% and 20% CS, and mixes that have 20% CS incorporated with 10%, 20%, and 30% CFA.
9 The method of replacement was by volume. A slump test was done to determine the concrete’s workability, dimensions of
10 samples and its weights were taken to acquire its density, and compressive testing was done to obtain its compressive
11 strengths. The results show that the degree of workability of concrete decreases as the replacement percentages of coconut
12 shells and coal fly ash increase. The graph of its densities has a downward trend and the results of its long-term
13 compressive strengths manifest that the CFA used in this study does not enhance the quality of concrete with 20% coconut
14 shells replaced as coarse aggregates.
15
16 Keywords: coconut shell, coal fly ash, partial replacement, concrete, compressive strength

17
18 1. Introduction
19
20 Concrete is considered the widely used construction material up to date. Concrete is a mixture of cement,
21 fine and coarse aggregates, and water in which its design mix and proportion is directly proportional to its
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
22 design strength. Properties such as high strength, hardness, durability, imperviousness, mouldability, high
23 thermal capacity, and good fire resistance are all acquired by concrete (Dvorkin, et. al, 2011).
24 The advancement of industrialization and urbanization here in the Philippines has brought about a high
25 demand for concrete, and thus a massive need for raw materials for its production. Considering that the
26 materials for concrete are not renewable, this poses a threat to our environment.
27 According to the Cement Industry Association of the Philippines Executive Director Cirilo Pestaño, the
28 local cement manufacturing industry currently has an annual capacity of producing 32 to 33 million tons of
29 cement (“Local Manufacturers”, 2019). While a continuous extraction of aggregates from our natural resources
30 can result in depletion and environmental decline. Having said, an alternative solution has been introduced and
31 that is to use the wastes from industry and agriculture as materials for making concrete (Jumaat, et. al, 2014).
32
33 1.1 Coconut shell as partial replacement of coarse aggregate
34
35 Coconut shell (CS) has properties that make it more suitable as an alternative aggregate, specifically for
36 coarse aggregate (Jain and Kanojia, 2017). A research was conducted to determine the durability of coconut
37 shells through the Los Angeles abrasion method. The results showed that coconut shells have a higher abrasion
38 value compared to conventional coarse aggregates. This means that concrete containing coconut shells will have
39 a high level of resistance to wear and can be utilized to produce floors and pavements (Regin, 2015). Moreover,
40 coconut shells also absorb less moisture compared to other agricultural wastes and are considered non-
41 biodegradable (Jain and Kanojia, 2017). From the study of Talbot and Treseder (2012), one of their hypotheses
42 is that lignin, a chemical compound present in coconut shells, defends cell-wall polysaccharides from decaying.
43 As concluded in the study of Annadurai, et. al (2012), strengths of their Coconut Shell Concrete (CSC) samples
44 increased even after a year (365 days) which can be an indication that there was no biological decay. Because of
45 these, coconut shell has been recognized as non-biodegradable.
46 In addition, coconut shell blends well with cement and both are compatible with each other. When hard
47 and of organic origin, wood-based materials are mixed with other components of concrete, these materials will
48 not contaminate (Basri, 1999). The study of Annadurai, et. al proved that even at the later ages, CSC has no
49 bond failure and has maintained its good quality. A study also shows that the bond between cement paste and
50 coconut shells appears to be better (Leman, et. al, 2016). Likewise, the density of concrete decreases as the
51 replacement percentage of coconut shells as coarse aggregates increases (Anbuvel and Subramani, 2016). From
52 the results obtained by Gunasekaran (2011), the densities of CSC samples were ranged from 1930 to 1970
53 kg/m3. These samples can be considered as structural lightweight concrete (LWC) since the values passed the
54 required density of an LWC which is 2000 kg/m3 or less.
55 Aside from all the advantages of utilizing coconut shells as a partial replacement for aggregates, there
56 are disadvantages to it too. The workability of the composites with coconut shells decreases as the percentage of
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
57 replacement increases (Leman, et. al, 2016). According to the research by Bhaskar, et. al (2019), conventional
58 concrete using normal aggregates has better performance than CSC. It can be described in their experimental
59 results that an increase in the percentage of coconut shells in concrete results in an increase of voids. Twenty-
60 eighth-day compressive strengths are also decreasing as illustrated in the results for both M20 (around 3000 psi)
61 and M25 (around 3700 psi) mix design. However, the concrete with a 30% replacement barely passed the
62 required compressive strength. From the study of Ahlawat and Kalurkar (2014), they have replaced the coarse
63 aggregates by 0%-10% with 2.5% increments and the trend of the 28th compressive strength is also declining.
64 Because of this, the researchers have planned to improve the compressive strength of CSC by replacing part of
65 cement with coal fly ash. This method of improvising the compressive strengths of CSC is adapted from the
66 study of Bharath, et. al (2015) where there is an increase of compressive strength of CSC when it is mixed with
67 coal fly ash as a partial replacement for cement.
68
69 1.2 Coal fly ash as partial replacement of cement
70
71 About 2,300 years ago, production of the earliest known hydraulic cement made use of fly ash (FA). Fly
72 ashes were more likely to be volcano ashes and are considered as a pozzolan. A pozzolan is a
73 siliceous/aluminous material that when associated with lime and water, forms a cementitious compound. Today,
74 fly ash can be obtained from coal-fired and electricity-generating power plants instead of volcanoes (Bharath, et.
75 al, 2015). As defined from the ASTM C618, fly ash is the fine residue from the combustion of powdered coal
76 and is conveyed by flue gasses.
77 Million tons of coal fly ash wastes were used in construction-related applications. Including in these various
78 applications is the cement production for concrete making (Federal Highway Administration Research and
79 Technology). In the Philippines, coal fly ash wastes from ash-producing-industry accumulate to approximately
80 300,000 tons per annum (Elevado, et. al, 2018). In fact, these companies have difficulties consuming all the fly
81 ash wastes they produced leaving them with no choice but to dispose them.
82 Although there are several classes of fly ash, class C and class F fly ashes are the two most common. “Class
83 F fly ash is typically produced from burning anthracite or bituminous coal, but may also be produced from sub-
84 bituminous coal and lignite (ASTM C618).” There are also specific physical and chemical properties listed in
85 ASTM C618 that class F fly ash must possess. Whereas, “Class C fly ash is typically produced from burning
86 lignite or sub-bituminous coal, and may also be produced from anthracite or bituminous coal (ASTM C618).”
87 Aside from acquiring pozzolanic properties, it also has some cementitious properties and has higher calcium
88 oxide content than class F fly ash. Other physical and chemical requirements for class C fly ash are enumerated
89 in ASTM C618.
90 Limiting the production of Portland cement is needed since it is responsible for 6-7% of the total carbon
91 dioxide produced by humans according to Magureanu and Negrutiu (2009). That’s the reason why replacing
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
92 cement without compromising its workability and strength is necessary. According to the same research the
93 workability of the concrete increases when the composite is accompanied by fly ash. There’s an improvement in
94 the workability of concrete because of fly ash’s spherical shaped particles which provide a lubricant effect as
95 these act as miniature ball bearings. The lubricant effect of fly ash also reduces the frictional losses during the
96 pumping of concrete, thus improving the concrete’s pumpability (American Coal Ash Association, 2013). Fine
97 particles of fly ash act as an efficient void-filler for the pores that the composite possesses, resulting in a denser
98 microstructure. Because of this, the presence of fly ash improves the bond strength between the concrete and a
99 round steel bar. This theory was proven by the study of Mehta, P. (2004). According to Bharath, et. al (2015),
100 resistance to corrosion of concrete reinforcement, attack from Alkali-silica reaction, sulfate attack, and acids and
101 salt attack are among the other benefits of fly ash.
102 The results obtained from the study of Kraus, et.al (2003) show that concrete with a high volume of fly ash
103 increases its compressive strength over time. The percent increase in the magnitude of compressive strengths
104 was around 69% to 200% for 7-14 years’ duration. The study also proved that Class F fly ash has high long-term
105 compressive strengths compared to Class C fly ash. However, the latter has better early compressive strengths.
106 The increase in strength will be only visible after several years. Being said, the 28th-day compressive
107 strength of conventional concrete is much better than of the concrete containing a high volume of fly ash. From
108 the data of Magureanu and Negrutiu (2009), the concrete’s early compressive and tensile strength decreases by
109 around 30% making it appropriate for small to medium compressive strength classes only.
110
111 1.3 Combination of the two materials as partial replacements
112
113 When both the coconut shells and fly ash are used as a replacement for coarse aggregate and cement
114 respectively, there is a positive result. As what is observed in the study of Bharath (2015), the compressive
115 strength of 10% replacement of coconut shells as coarse aggregates associated with 10% replacement of fly ash
116 as cement is better than replacing the coarse aggregates with 10% coconut shells alone. When the percentage of
117 fly ash is increased, there is also a minute increase in its compressive strength. From the numbers obtained, it
118 can be perceived that fly ash and coconut shell bonds well. As for this particular research study, the researchers
119 have agreed to increase the percentage of coconut shells replacement to 20% as this will help the researchers
120 determine if the increase of compressive strength will be possible even when the percentage of coconut shells is
121 altered. Thirty percent replacement of coal fly ash as cement is also added for this research since the study of
122 Bharath only limits the replacement level to 20%, Limiting the percentage replacement to 20% will result in
123 fewer chances in obtaining the true maximum replacement level for coal fly ash.
124 Knowing the properties of CS and CFA, and its compatibility as concrete materials, it is important to know
125 the effects of CFA at a fixed percentage of CS. By placing the CS at a fixed percentage and making CFA as the
126 variable, the difference in workability at every increment of CFA will be determined. The control of water for
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
127 concrete mix is necessary. Too much water will induce poor performance knowing that as water increases in the
128 mix, the distance between the particles of cement increases which means poor bonding and the poor result (Rao,
129 et. al 2015). Only a few studies have been done on the effects of w/c ratio on wood/cement ratio due to wide
130 varieties of wood according to Rao, et al (2015).
131 A lot of studies are usually at 10%, 20%, and 30% of CS as a replacement by weight and every increment
132 has a definitive effect on water demand. Coconut shells have lesser specific gravity compared to the
133 conventional aggregate, thus resulting in a higher volume of a batch of concrete mix which increases the water
134 demand. Effects of CFA in water demand is one area in concrete mix design with CS where there is a need for
135 study and improvements. For this study, the partial replacement of coal fly ash and coconut shells will be by
136 volume, hence there’s no need to change the water to cement ratio for all the trial mixes. By fixing the
137 percentage of CS means that the water to cement ratio will be fixed and the behavior of the concrete mix in
138 terms of workability as CFA replaces cement from 10% to 30% will be determined in this study.
139 Since the majority of the study achieved an optimum design ranging from 20% to 40% CS as partial
140 replacement of coarse aggregates without any other replacement, it is necessary to stay within the range wherein
141 it still satisfies the required strength for further improvements since studies of CS as construction material
142 substitute are still on premature stage (Bhaskar, et. al). Researchers need to find materials that are suitable and
143 compatible with CS, one of which is fly ash. Not going too aggressive on the percentage of CS as a partial
144 replacement would be necessary to avoid risk factors that can cause poor performance of the concrete that could
145 render this study useless. Knowing that mix design with CS and CFA could achieve the required strength at 20
146 MPa (around 3000 psi) and 25 MPa (around 3700 psi), increasing the strength to 4000 psi with 20% CS would
147 be a breakthrough from previous studies.
148 The research aims to find ways to minimize the use of raw materials in the production of concrete and
149 maximize the use of agricultural and industrial wastes. With sustainability in mind, the research aims to aid in
150 providing environment-friendly ways towards urbanization and nation-building.
151
152
153 2. Main Discussion
154
155 In this study, concrete design mixes were made to determine the effects of the combination of coal fly ash
156 and coconut shells as partial replacements of cement and coarse aggregates, respectively, at varying degrees.
157 These design mixes include the conventional concrete, concrete with 10% and 20% partial replacement of
158 coconut shells as coarse aggregates, and concrete with 20% partial replacement of coconut shells as coarse
159 aggregates and a partial replacement of coal fly ash as cement at 10%, 20%, and 30%. The conventional
160 concrete will serve as the control sample.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
161 Materials used for the concrete undertook physical property tests that are in accordance with the ASTM
162 standards. These tests include sieve analysis, specific gravity, moisture content, and organic impurities test.
163 The sand, gravel, and cement were obtained through a local supplier in Cebu while CS was acquired
164 from the municipality of Carmen. The town of Carmen has an abundant number of bearing coconut trees and
165 most of their coconut shell farmers consider CS as wastes. On the other hand, coal fly ash was taken fresh from
166 the silo of the Toledo Power Plant Corporation.
167
168 2.1 Preparation and determination of the materials’ properties
169
170 Materials such as the sand, gravel, and coconut shells underwent the quartering method in order to
171 obtain a homogenous sample of aggregates and to allow increase in uniformity of its properties. Then, they were
172 sieved according to the size ranges of fine aggregates and coarse aggregates. After, these aggregates were
173 washed with water to remove unwanted impurities. Then, they were air-dried and stored in a tight place to keep
174 them from mixing with foreign materials. The cement and fly ash were stored in plastics and placed in a
175 Styrofoam box.
176
177 2.1.1 Cement
178
179 This study utilizes CEMEX APO Portland Type 1 Cement. Its specific gravity was 3.15, which was
180 determined by conducting the standard test method for the density of hydraulic cement (ASTM C188). Data and
181 results of the test are presented in Appendix A.
182
183 2.1.2 Fine Aggregates
184
185 This research utilizes sand coming from river beds as fine aggregates since most of the constructions
186 here in the Philippines use such type. The fineness modulus of the fine aggregate used was 3.0 and was
187 calculated accordingly after performing the sieve analysis (see Appendix B). Fine aggregates consumed for the
188 study underwent a series of tests in order to attain the values of its specific gravity dry (2.43), unit weight
189 (4,094), moisture content (3.93%), and its absorption (2.17%). ASTM C128 test method (see Appendix C) was
190 used to determine both the specific gravity and absorption and ASTM C29 (Appendix D) for the unit weight.
191 Moisture content calculation can be shown in Appendix E. In addition, ASTM C40 was performed to determine
192 if the sand used has impurities (Appendix F).
193
194
195
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
196 2.1.3 Coarse Aggregates
197
198 Coarse aggregates are crushed stones with sizes ranging from 4.75 mm to 20 mm. In this study, ASTM
199 C127 was conducted to determine the relative density (specific gravity) and absorption of coarse aggregates.
200 Results of the test give values for specific gravity and absorption as 2.67 and 2.13%, respectively (see Appendix
201 G).
202 The unit weight and dry rodded unit weight of gravel were determined through conducting ASTM C29
203 (see Appendix H). And the moisture content of gravel was calculated in the same manner as the fine aggregates
204 (see Appendix I).
205
206 2.1.4 Coal Fly Ash
207
208 Coal fly ash was used to partially replace cement. The specific gravity of coal fly ash was 2.676,
209 which was determined through performing ASTM C188, the standard test method for density of hydraulic
210 cement (see Appendix J). The unit weight of fly ash, which was essential for the percent-replacement
211 computations, was calculated by multiplying its specific gravity by the unit weight of water. Class F fly ash
212 contains less than 20% lime (CaO) whereas class C fly ash comprises more than 20% lime (CaO). The essential
213 chemical and physical properties of coal fly ash are tabulated below.
214
215 Table I. Properties of coal fly ash
Properties Test Methods Value Typical Values
Specific Gravity Appendix J 2.676 1.9 – 2.8
Major Chemical Composition
% Al2O3 Gravimetric 27.4
% Fe2O3 Spectrophotometric 0.84
% SiO2 Gravimetric 14.7(±0.3)
% CaO 14.26(±1.9)
216
217 2.1.5 Coconut Shell
218
219 Coconut Shells are abundant biomass agricultural wastes that are considered non-biodegradable due to
220 its chemical composition. This fact is proved by previous studies, particularly from the studies of Jain and
221 Kanojia (2017), and from Talbot and Treseder (2012).
222 Properties such as specific gravity, dry rodded unit weight, and unit weight of CS were also determined.
223 The procedures for obtaining these properties were the same as those of conventional coarse aggregates. CS was
224 crushed into sizes ranging from 4.75 mm – 12.5 mm in diameter in order to be used as fine aggregates. Before
225 being mixed to concrete, the coconut shells went under a 24-hour submersion in potable water in order to
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
226 achieve a saturated surface dry condition. This method was used by the study of Annadurai and et.al (2012).
227 Presented below is the summary of the physical properties of coconut shells.
228
229 Table II. Properties of coconut shells
Physical Properties Value Test Methods
Specific Gravity 1.29 Appendix K
𝑙𝑏
Unit Weight 2,173 Appendix L
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑘𝑔
Dry-Rodded Unit Weight 569 Appendix L
𝑚3
Water Absorption 15.90 % Appendix K
230
231 2.2 Research methodology and calculation
232
233 The design mixes for this study was obtained by following the calculation method based from the
234 American Concrete Institute. A total of 24 trial mixes of concrete were prepared. The sample mix designs were
235 prepared at the Construction Materials and Testing Laboratory of the Department of Civil Engineering,
236 University of San Carlos – TC.
237 The samples were submerged at the curing pond right beside the CMT Laboratory for 220 days until
238 testing. All testing done to the sample were taken place at the CMT Lab.
239
240 2.2.1 Calculation of concrete mix design (American Concrete Institute)
241
242 The calculation of the replacement of gravel with coconut shells, and of cement with coal fly ash was
243 done using the volumetric method. For this study, the control sample was the conventional mix design of 4000
244 psi. Samples containing 10% and 20% partial replacement of CS with no CFA were made for the second
245 control. Then, samples containing 20% CS with 10-30% CFA were made as to the experimental design. See
246 Appendix M for the complete computation.
247
248 2.2.1 Determination of workability, density and compressive strength
249
250 During the preparation of a mix, a slump test was done to determine the consistency of the concrete. The
251 slump was measured by the distance from the top of the slumped concrete to the level of the top of the slump
252 cone. Before testing for the compressive strength, the specimen was weighed to determine its weight per unit
253 volume. Each specimen was tested for the 220th compressive strength. The load at failure during testing divided
254 the specimen’s cross-sectional area gives the compressive strength.
255
256
257
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
258 2.3 Assumptions, hypotheses and limitations
259
260 The percentage of CS as a replacement for CA was maintained at 20% when coal fly ash was
261 incorporated. This was done to ensure good concrete performance and avoid any factors of risk. Among all the
262 strength properties of concrete only the compressive strength is considered for this study since it is the most
263 significant property of concrete.
264 The breaking of the coconut shells was done manually. This will affect the uniformity of the coconut
265 shells in the samples. The particular species of the coconut shells used for this study is not be specified in this
266 study due to limited resources.
267 Moreover, the w/c ratio was made constant throughout the design mix to determine the effects of CFA in
268 the workability of the mixture.
269 Long term effect of the by-products utilized in concrete was considered in this research. The 7th, 14th,
270 and 28th – day compressive strength values were not presented because of the quarantine measures implemented
271 during the pandemic. Instead, compression testing for the samples was done after 220 days of curing. In a study
272 conducted by Kraus, et. al (2003), concrete with a high volume of fly ash has a greater long-term effect than its
273 short term. Thus, this study will see if such will also be the case when coconut shell is incorporated in concrete.
274 According to the study of Bharath, et. al (2015), there is an increase of compressive strength in concrete
275 with 10% coconut shells as coarse aggregates when associated with a percentage of coal fly ash replaced as
276 cement. The results of their study can be an indication that there is really a good bonding between the two by-
277 products. This study can be compared to Bharath’s but changes were made including the method of calculating
278 the design mix, the replacement percentages, the properties of both coal fly ash and coconut shells, and even the
279 properties of the aggregates. This study will show if coal fly ash is an effective material to strengthen up
280 concrete with 20% coconut shells replaced as coarse aggregates.
281
282
283 3. Results and Discussion
284
285 The temperature of the working place ranges from 28.5 - 29.8 ℃ with an average humidity of 98 %. The
286 materials used in this research were cement, coal fly ash as partial replacement of cement, sand, gravel, and
287 crushed coconut shells as partial replacement of coarse aggregates. The result summaries of the workability,
288 densities, and compressive strengths of concrete are presented using tables. Moreover, a compressive strength
289 analysis with the use of graphs and trend lines is also shown.
290
291
292
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
293 3.1. Workability of the concrete mix
294
295 In this study, the height of the slump of every concrete mix was carefully recorded. The collected data are
296 shown in Table 1a and Table 1b and these are analyzed with the use of graphs shown in Figure 1a and Figure
297 1b. The slump of the mix represents the workability of the concrete. The lesser value of slump, the lesser degree
298 of workability the concrete mix has, and vice versa. That is according to Leman et al. (2017) on their
299 workability for concrete with coconut shells study.
300 For the control mix with no (0 %) coconut shells and coal fly ash added, it recorded 3.625 in (92 mm) in
301 slump. The mixture with 10 % coconut shells recorded 3.5 in (89 mm), 3.26% lesser than the control mix.
302 Whereas, the concrete mix with 20% coconut shells recorded 3.375 in (86mm) which is 6.5% lesser than the
303 control mix and 3.4% lesser than the mixture with 10% coconut shells. All three slumps have a higher degree of
304 workability since the minimum slump is 3 in (75mm). From the result, it is clear that the trend of the slump is
305 downward. This is probably because of the high absorption of the coconut shells.
306
Table 1a. Workability test of concrete with
307 no coal fly ash
Coconut Shell
Percentage Slump Reading (inches)
Replacement
Control 3.625
10% 3.5
20% 3.375

3.65
3.6
Slump (inches)

3.55
3.5
3.45 y = -0.0125x + 3.625
3.4
3.35
0 5 10 15 20 25
% replacement of coconut shell

308 Figure 1a. Relationship between the slump and coconut shell percentage replacement
309
310 The data with 20% coconut shells associated with coal fly ash are presented in Table 1b. For the
311 concrete mix with 10% coal fly ash and with a fixed percentage of coconut shells at 20%, it recorded 3.25 in
312 (83mm), 9.78% lesser than the control mix, and 3.5% lesser than 20% coconut shells with no fly ash. The
313 mixture with 20% coal fly ash recorded 3.2 in (81mm), 5.8% lesser than the 20% coconut shells with no fly ash.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
314 For the mixture with 30% coal fly ash, it recorded 3.15 in (80mm) which is 13% lesser than the control mix and
315 7% lesser than the 20% coconut shells with no fly ash. From the results obtained, the workability of coal fly ash
316 with 20% coconut shells has a downward trend (see Figure 1b). It means, as the percentage replacement of coal
317 fly ash as cement increases, the lesser the degree of workability of the concrete mix becomes. This contradicts
318 the conclusion of Bharath et al. (2015) and Yerramala et al. (2012), which states that the increase of coal fly ash
319 increases the workability of the concrete.
320 Table 1b. Workability test of concrete with coal fly ash
Coal Fly Ash
Percentage Replacement Slump Reading (inches)
with 20% Coconut Shells
0 3.375
10% 3.25
20% 3.2
30% 3.15

3.4
Slump (inches)

3.35
3.3 y = -0.0073x + 3.3525
3.25
3.2
3.15
3.1
0 10 20 30 40
% replacement of coal fly ash

321 Figure 1b. Relationship between the slump and coal fly ash with 20% coconut shells
322
323 Overall, increasing the percentage of coconut shells and coal fly ash as partial replacements to coarse
324 aggregates and cement, respectively, decreases the degree of workability of the concrete. Incorporating coal fly
325 ash does not help increase the workability of concrete with coconut shells since its trend, based on the results of
326 this study, is downward (see Table 2 and Figure 2).
327
Table 2. Concrete Mix Design 3.7
3.6
Slump (inches)

CMD %CS and %FA 3.5 y = -0.0971x + 3.69

1 Control 3.4
2 10%CS and 0%FA 3.3
3 20%CS and 0%FA 3.2
4 20%CS and 10%FA 3.1
5 20%CS and 20%FA 3
6 20%CS and 30%FA 1 2 3 4 5 6

328 Concrete Mix Design

329 Figure 2. Relationship between the concrete mix design and the slump
330
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
331 3.2. Density
332
333 Although the same molds were used, samples sometimes contract or expand during the process of curing.
334 Therefore, the dimensions of the molds will not be always the same among all the samples. To recuperate this
335 inconsistency, the dimensions of the concrete samples were meticulously measured.
336 The densities of the concrete samples with no coal fly ash added are presented in Table 3a. The maximum
337 density was 2342 kg/m3, which was obtained by the control mix. The concrete mix with 10% coconut shell
338 replacement for coarse aggregates recorded 2306 kg/m3. It dropped 1.5% relative to the control mix. As for the
339 concrete mix with 20% coconut shells, it recorded 2254 kg/m3 which is 3.8% lesser than the control mix.
340 Increasing the percentage replacement of coconut shells decreases the density of the concrete, hence the trend is
341 downward (see Figure 3a). This is because coconut shells are much lighter than gravel. A similar trend was
342 found in the study of Yerrramala et al. (2012).
343
Table 3a. Density of concrete with partial
344 replacement of coconut shells with no fly ash added
Coconut Shell Percentage
Density (kg/m3)
Replacement
Control 2342
10% 2306
20% 2254

2360
Density (kg/m3)

2340
2320
y = -4.3953x + 2344.9
2300
2280
2260
2240
0 5 10 15 20 25
% replacement of coconut shell

345 Figure 3a. Relationship between coconut shell percentage replacement and unit density
346
347 The densities of the concrete with a fixed 20% coconut shells and added coal fly ash are presented in
348 Table 3b. With 10% coal fly ash, it recorded 2245 kg/m3, 0.4% lesser than the mix with 20% coconut shells,
349 and 0% fly ash. For the concrete sample with 20% coal fly ash, it recorded 2240 kg/m3. This is 0.62% lesser
350 than the mix with 20% coconut shells and 0% fly ash. The concrete with 30% coal fly ash recorded the lowest
351 density at 2227 kg/m3 which is 1.2% lesser than the mix with 20% coconut shells and 0% fly ash. It is observed
352 that there is a drop in density as a percentage replacement of coal fly ash as cement increases.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
353
Table 3b. Density of concrete with partial replacement
354 of coconut shells with coal fly ash added
Coal Fly Ash
Percentage with 20% Density (kg/m3)
Coconut Shell
0 2254
10% 2245
20% 2240
30% 2227
2260
2255
Density (kg/m3)

2250 y = -0.8825x + 2254.9

2245
2240
2235
2230
2225
0 10 20 30 40
% replacement of coal fly ash

355 Figure 3b. Relationship between coal fly ash percentage replacement with 20% coconut shells and unit density
356
357
358 After combining all the results from the various mixes, the resulting trend of its graph is downward.
359 Both coconut shells and coal fly ash decrease the density of concrete (see figure 4). Particularly, coconut shells
360 have a greater effect on decreasing the density of concrete compared to coal fly ash based on the differences in
361 their values.
362
2360
363 2340
364
Density (kg/m3)

2320
365 2300
366 2280

367 2260
2240
368
2220 y = -22.429x + 2347.6
369
2200
370 1 2 3 4 5 6
371 Concrete Mix Design
372 Figure 4. Relationship between the concrete mix design and the density
373
374
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
375 3.3. Compressive Strength
376
377 The concrete design for this study is 4000 psi. The control mix was prepared using conventional
378 construction materials to differentiate the effects of coconut shells and coal fly ash as alternative construction
379 materials. The compressive strengths of the concrete samples were obtained after 220 days of curing.
380 Compressive strengths of concrete with coconut shells and no coal fly ash incorporated are presented in
381 Table 4a. After 220 days of curing, the control mix obtained an average of 5489 psi compressive strength, a 37%
382 increase from the 28th-day target of 4000 psi. Incorporating 10% of coconut shells shows a significant drop of
383 strength at 4629 psi which is 16% lesser than the control mix. With the 20% coconut shells, it dropped
384 significantly at 4434 psi, 19% lesser than the control mix. It was observed that the 10 and 20 percent of coconut
385 shells replaced as coarse aggregates passed 4000 psi which is the actual design. It means both concrete mixes
386 continued to gain strength even after the 28th day. In a separate study by Kanojia et al. (2017), the same trend of
387 compressive strength was observed. However, the concrete with 20% coconut shells dropped by 10.6% based on
388 their data recorded.
389
Table 4a. Compressive strengths with partial
390 replacement of coconut shells
Coconut Shell Percentage Compressive
Replacement Strength (Psi)
Control 5489
10% 4629
20% 4434

5600
5400
Strength (Psi)

5200
y = -52.792x + 5378.5
5000
4800
4600
4400
4200
4000
0 5 10 15 20 25
% replacement of coconut shell

391 Figure 5a. Relationship between coconut shell percentage replacement and compressive strength
392
393 The compressive strengths of the concrete mixes with 20% coconut shells and coal fly ash are presented
394 in Table 4b. The results show a continued decrease in compressive strength. The concrete mix with 20% CS and
395 10% CFA recorded 4235 psi, 20% CFA recorded 4133 psi and finally, the least compressive strength was
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
396 obtained by the 30% CFA at 3952 psi. The last concrete mix design is the only mix that falls below the
397 minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi.
398
399 Table 4b. Compressive strengths with partial
400 replacement of coconut shells with coal fly ash added
Coal Fly Ash
Compressive
Percentage Replacement
Strength (Psi)
with 20% Coconut Shell
0 4434
10% 4235
20% 4133
30% 3952

4500
4400
Strength (Psi)

y = -15.456x + 4420.2
4300
4200
4100
4000
3900
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
% replacement of coal fly ash

401 Figure 5b. Relationship between coal fly ash percentage replacement and compressive strength
402
403 Looking at the bigger picture, the compressive strengths of CMD 1 to 6 are in a downtrend (see Figure
404 6). There was no sign of an increase of compressive strength when the coal fly ash was added at any percentage.
405 In a separate study by Bharath et al. (2015) and Srilakshmi (2018), there was an increase of compressive
406 strength when they incorporated 10 - 20 % of coal fly ash in concrete. However, they added coal fly ash to
407 concrete with only 10% coconut shells. It is clear from the data and the graph that it is not the same case at 20%
408 coconut shells. This might be caused by the different chemical compositions of coal fly ash used in this study.
409 The coal fly ash utilized in this research is classified as class F fly ash basing on the values of the major
410 chemical compositions. According to the analysis of Sutter (2015), associating class F CFA in concrete results
411 to poor compressive strength compared to class C CFA. Furthermore, the observation mentioned earlier suggests
412 that there is no sufficient bond between the coconut shells and coal fly ash which are used in this study that will
413 supposedly improve the strength of the concrete. The reason for this might be the low workability of the
414 concrete mix caused by coal fly ash and coconut shells. In a separate study by Leman et al. (2016), it was
415 mentioned that because of the high water absorption of coconut shells, the degree of workability decreases
416 which affects the concrete strength.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
417
6000
418
5500
419 5000

Strength (Psi)
420 4500
4000
421
3500 y = -267.76x + 5415.8
422 3000
423 2500

424 2000
1 2 3 4 5 6
425 Concrete Mix Design
426
427 Figure 6. Relationship between the concrete mix design and compressive strength
428
429 Based on the graph shown in Figure 7, there is a good relationship between the parameters. Evidently,
430 the compressive strength of the concrete mix with 20% CS and CFA has the same trend as the density. As the
431 density decreases, the compressive strength decreases as well. Based on the trend, this strongly suggests that
432 there is a lack of bond between the 20% coconut shells with added coal fly ash.
433 4500 2260
434 4400 2255

Density (kg/cu.m)
435 2250 Compressive
Strength (Psi)

4300 Strength
436 2245
437 4200 Density
2240
438 4100
2235
439
4000 2230
440
3900 2225
441
0 10 20 30 40
442 % replacement of coal fly ash

Figure 7. Behavior of samples’ compressive strengths trend and density trend when coal fly ash is incorporated

443
444 4. Conclusions and Recommendation
445
446 This study aims to evaluate the effects of coconut shells and coal fly ash as partial replacements of coarse
447 aggregates and cement, respectively, to concrete in terms of workability, density, and long term compressive
448 strength.
449 The results acquired from the slump tests show that coconut shells can negatively affect the workability of
450 concrete. Incorporating coal fly ash does not aid the unfavorable effect of CS to the concrete’s workability.
451 From the data obtained, the graph shows a decreasing slope in workability, and no sign of improvement was
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
452 noticed. However, the reference studies, including Bharath’s and Yerramala’s, have affirmative results on the
453 effect of coal fly ash on CSC’s workability. Different types and characteristics of coal fly ash used between this
454 study and previous researchers may be the reason for the contrasting result. Furthermore, the temperature and
455 humidity of the working space and human errors should also be put into consideration.
456 Densities of the concrete samples were decreasing as the percentages of coconut shell replacement and coal
457 fly ash replacement increase. In figures, there has been a 3.8% decrease in density when 20% of coarse
458 aggregates were replaced by coconut shells relative to the conventional mix. Whereas, the concrete with 20%
459 coconut shell replacement and 30% coal fly ash replacement has 1.2% lesser density value than the concrete
460 with 20% coconut shell replacement. It is noticeable that the coconut shells have a greater influence than coal
461 fly ash on the density of concrete.
462 As for the last objective, this study shows that replacing coarse aggregates with coconut shells can lessen the
463 compressive strength of concrete. However, the samples with coconut shells still exceed 4000 psi, the expected
464 28th – day compressive strength. This means that the strength of coconut shell concrete continues to increase
465 even after 220 days of curing. For this study, adding coal fly ash to a coconut shell concrete can’t improve its
466 long term compressive strength. Although other researchers have concluded that the enormous long term
467 effectivity of coal fly ash to concrete can be seen, the results obtained in this study refute their conclusion.
468 Perhaps, coconut shells and coal fly ash do not actually bond well or it is because the type and characteristics of
469 coal fly ash used were different. In conclusion, the differences and trend of the long term compressive strengths
470 manifest that the type of coal fly ash used in this study does not have positive effects on concrete with 20%
471 coconut shells replaced as coarse aggregates.
472 To improve this study, it is essential to determine the 7th, 14th, and 28th compressive strengths of concrete
473 to have enough basis on the long term effects of coal fly ash. It is also a must to carefully examine the chemical
474 components of coal fly ash, which can help on improving the compressive strength, which will be utilized in the
475 study.
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
486 Acknowledgements
487
488 The authors would like to extend our sincerest gratitude and acknowledge the personages who have
489 contributed to the success of this research. Without their active guidance, cooperation, and encouragement, this
490 paper wouldn’t have come close to a possibility.
491 Foremost, we offer this endeavor to GOD Almighty for bestowing us the wisdom, strength of mind, and
492 good health for us to be able to continue our research despite the daunting circumstances that the world has
493 fallen into because of the pandemic.
494 To our parents who supported us physically, mentally, emotionally and financially. Whose love, support,
495 and encouragement had motivated us to continue despite the uncertainties that COVID-19 has put upon.
496 We are highly grateful to our adviser, Engr. Imadyl Cayanong – Damuag, for believing in this study’s
497 potential from day one. We extend our heartfelt obligations for guiding and imparting us the knowledge and
498 insights throughout this research despite personal tragedies.
499 Engr. Aida Lebunfacil, our laboratory-in-charge, without whom our research would be vaguely
500 impossible. We are sincerely grateful for guiding us in our experiments and helping us with our laboratory
501 works.
502 Distinguished panelists headed by Engr. Janice Jamora, together with Engr. Aida Lebunfacil, Engr.
503 Nophi Ian Biton, and Engr. Joey Cyndell Atillo for the approval of our work.
504 Our Department Chairman, Engr. Ricardo Fornis, for the support and for helping us find ways to continue
505 our research despite the implemented lockdown.
506 Last and not the least, our thanks to our friends and classmates who have directly or indirectly help us in this
507 research.
508
509 References
510
511 Ahlawat, D., & Kalurkar, L. G. (2014). Coconut Shell as a Partial Replacement to Coarse Aggregate in Concrete.
512 Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 2014, 693–697.
513 American Coal Ash Association. (2013). Fly Ash Facts for Highway Engineers. Journal of Chemical Information and
514 Modeling, 53(9), 1689–1699. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
515 American Society for Testing and Materials International. (n.d.-b). ASTM C128 Standard Test Method for Specific Gravity
516 and Absorption of Fine Aggregates.
517 American Society for Testing and Materials International. (n.d.-a). ASTM C 136 Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of
518 Fine and Coarse Aggregates.

519 American Society for Testing and Materials International. (n.d.-b). ASTM C40 Standard Test Method for Organic
520 Impurities in Fine Aggregates for Concrete. 99–100.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
521 American Society for Testing and Materials International. (2001). ASTM C127 Standard Test Method for Specific Gravity
522 and Absorption of Coarse Aggregates. 04(Reapproved), 1–5.

523 American Society for Testing and Materials International. (2014). ASTM C618 Standard Specification
524 for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1520/C0618
525 Baconguis, S. R. (2007). Abandoned biomass resource statistics in the philippines. Journal of Abandoned Biomass, 2(6), 1–
526 12.
527 Basri, H., Mannan, M. A., & Mohd. Zain, M. F. (1999). Concrete using waste oil palm shells as aggregate. Cement and
528 Concrete Research, 29(4), 619-622. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(98)00233-6
529 Bhaskar, M. U., Manasa, S., & T, A. K. (2019). Concrete Mix Using Solid Waste Aggregates (Coconut Shell Concrete).
530 International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 8(10), 84–89.
531 https://doi.org/10.35940/ijitee.i8658.0881019
532 Child, R., & Ramanathan, S.. (1938). Composition of Coconut Shells. Journal of the American Chemical Society 1938
533 60 (6), 1506-1507 DOI: 10.1021/ja01273a501
534 Dvorkin, L., Nwaubani, S., & Dvorkin, O. (2011). Construction materials. Construction Materials, 45–91.
535 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-88887-7.50012-X
536 Elevado, K. J. T., Galupino, J. G., & Gallardo, R. S. (2018). Compressive strength modelling of concrete mixed with fly
537 ash and waste ceramics using K-Nearest Neighbor Algorithm. International Journal of GEOMATE, 15(48), 169–174.
538 https://doi.org/10.21660/2018.48.99305

539 Gunasekaran, K., Annadurai, R., & Kumar, P. S. (2012). Long term study on compressive and bond strength of coconut
540 shell aggregate concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 28(1), 208–215.
541 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.072
542 Gunasekaran, K., Kumar, P. S., & Lakshmipathy, M. (2011). Mechanical and bond properties of coconut shell concrete.
543 Construction and Building Materials, 25(1), 92–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.06.053
544 Kačík, F., Ďurkovič, J., & Kačíková, D. (2012). Chemical profiles of wood components of poplar clones for their energy
545 utilization. Energies, 5(12), 5243–5256.
546 Kambli, P. S., & Mathapati, S. R. (2015). Application Of Coconut Shell As Coarse Aggregate In Concrete: A Technical
547 Review. International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research, 2(11), 4084–4089.
548 Kanojia, A., & Jain, S. K. (2017). Performance of coconut shell as coarse aggregate in concrete. Construction and Building
549 Materials, 140, 150–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.02.066
550 Leman, A. S., Shahidan, S., Yusuf, M. Y., Mohd Zuki, S. S., & Misnon, N. A. (2016). Workability and Compressive
551 Strength for Concrete with Coconut Shell Aggregate. MATEC Web of Conferences, 87, 1–7.
552 https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20178701017

553 Magureanu, C., & Negrutiu, C. (2009). Performance of concrete containing high volume coal fly ash - green concrete. WIT
554 Transactions on Engineering Sciences, 64, 373–379. https://doi.org/10.2495/MC090351
555 Mehta, P.. (2004). High-performance, high-volume fly ash concrete for sustainable development. Proceedings of the
556 International Workshop on Sustainable Development and Concrete Technology.
557 Naik, T. R., Ramme, B. W., Kraus, R. N., & Siddique, R. (2003). Long-term performance of high volume fly ash concrete
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
558 pavements. ACI Materials Journal, 100(2), 150–155. https://doi.org/10.14359/12555

559 Not Listed. (2018, December 20). Local manufacturers raises alarm over sudden rise of imported cement. ABS-CBN News.
560 https://news.abs-cbn.com/business/12/20/18/local-manufacturers-raises-alarm-over-sudden-rise-of-imported-cement
561 Philippine Statistics Authority. (2019, October 14). Construction Statistics from Approved Building Permits : Second
562 Quarter 2019 (Preliminary Results). Retrieved November 9, 2019, from https://psa.gov.ph/content/construction-
563 statistics-approved-building-permits-second-quarter-2019-preliminary-results

564 Rao, K. V., Swaroop, A. H. L., Rao, P. K. R., & Bharath, N. (2015). Study on Strength Properties of Coconut Shell
565 Concrete. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 6(3), 42–61.
566 Reddy, B. D., Jyothy, S. A., & Shaik, F. (2014). Experimental Analysis of the Use of Coconut Shell as Coarse Aggregate.
567 IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, 10(6), 06–13. https://doi.org/10.9790/1684-1060613
568 Jerlin Regin, J. (2015). A Study on the Behavior of Coconut Shell in Lightweight Concrete. 74–91.
569 Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10603/140355
570 Shafigh, P., Mahmud, H. Bin, Jumaat, M. Z., & Zargar, M. (2014). Agricultural wastes as aggregate in concrete mixtures -
571 A review. Construction and Building Materials, 53, 110–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.11.074
572 Subramani, T., & Anbuvel, A. (2016). Experimental Behaviour Of Reinforced Concrete Beams With Coconut Shell As
573 Coarse Aggregate. International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management, 5(5), 9.
574 Sutter, L. (2015). Comparison of Class C Versus Class F Fly Ash for Concrete Pavement. Wisconsin Highway Research
575 Program, (0092), No. 0092-12-04.
576 Talbot, J. M., & Treseder, K. K. (2012). Interactions among lignin, cellulose, and nitrogen drive litter chemistry-decay
577 relationships. Ecology, 93(2), 345–354. https://doi.org/10.1890/11-0843.1
578 U.S Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. User Guidelines for Waste and Byproduct Materials in
579 Pavement Construction. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/ research/infrastructure/structures/97148/cfa51.cfm
580
581
582 Notations (Signs)

583
584 ACI - American Concrete Institute
585 - A leading organization which publishes numerous standards for concrete and
586 construction. One of these is their method for calculating concrete mix design.
587 ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials
588 - An international standard developing organization for construction materials, products,
589 procedures, and services. It is recognized as one of the world’s largest of its kind.
590 CFA - coal fly ash
591 - By-product of a coal generated power plant that is said to be a suitable replacement for
592 cement.
593 CS - coconut shells
594 - The hard outer part of a coconut fruit which can be an appropriate substitution to coarse
595 aggregates.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
596 CSC - coconut shell concrete
597 - A concrete with coconut shells as replacement to conventional aggregates.
598 compressive strength - It is the capacity of a concrete to withstand compression loads.
599 density - It is the ratio between the mass of the concrete sample to its volume. Denser sample
600 may signify stronger concrete since it has lesser amount voids and porosity.
601 workability - It is a measure of how easy a fresh concrete can be mixed, placed, compacted and
602 finished.
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
638 Appendices
639
640 Appendix A: Standard Test Method for Density of Hydraulic Cement (ASTM C188)
641 Materials and Equipment Used:
642 Le Chatelier flask
643 Kerosene
644
645 Objectives:
646 To determine the density of the hydraulic cement by volume displacement
647
648 Procedure:
649 1. The flask was filled with kerosene to a point on the stem between the 0 and 1-mL mark. The first
650 volume reading was recorded.
651 2. A quantity of cement weighing 70 g was introduced. This was done making sure that the cement
652 does not adhere to the inside of the flask above the liquid.
653 3. The volume reading after the cement was introduced was taken. This was recorded as the second
654 reading.
655 4. The process was repeated for three trials.
656
657 Data and Calculation:
658 Table A.1
1st reading 2nd reading Volume
Mass of Density Specific
TRIAL Volume Volume difference
Cement (g) (g/mL) Gravity
(mL) (mL) (mL)
1 70 0.4 22.6 22.2 3.153 3.153
2 70 0.3 22.5 22.2 3.153 3.153
3 70 0.3 22.6 22.3 3.139 3.139
Average 3.148
659
(3.153 + 3.153 + 3.139)
660 SG Ave. = 3
= 3.14

661
662
663
664
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1
665 Conclusion:
666 The specific gravity of cement is used in calculating mixture proportions in this research’s
667 concrete designs. The specific gravity of Portland cement is generally around 3.15. In this experiment,
668 the result obtained for the specific gravity of cement is 3.148 which is close to the expected value.
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

700 Appendix B: Sieve Analysis for Fine Aggregates (ASTM C136)

701 Materials and Equipment Used:
702 Oven
703 Drying Pan/s
704 Balance
705 Set of Sieves
706 For Fine Aggregates – No. 4, No. 8, No. 10, No. 16, No. 20, No. 30, No. 40,
707 No. 50, No. 60, No. 70, No. 80, No. 100, Pan/ Receiver, Cover
708
709 Objectives:
710 The objective of the test is to determine the grain-size distribution of coarse and fine
711 aggregates by sieve analysis.
712
713 Procedure:
714 1. The aggregates obtained by the method of quartering were oven dried.
715 2. The oven dried sample was taken from the oven. It was cooled to room temperature and was
716 weighed.
717 3. The set of sieves, including the pan/receiver, were cleaned and weighed.
718 4. The weighed sieves were arranged from the biggest opening at the top to the smallest opening at
719 the bottom with the receiver at the bottom most of the set of sieves.
720 5. The set of sieves were placed on the sieve shaker then the oven dried aggregates were
721 carefully poured.
722 6. The sieves were covered with aggregates.
723 7. The sieve shaker was switched on for 10 minutes.
724 8. The sieve shaker automatically switched off after 10 minutes. The set of sieves were taken out from
725 the shaker.
726 9. Each sieve was weighed with the aggregates retained.
727 10. The cumulative weight retained, percent retained and percent passing were solved.
728
729 Data and Sample Computation:
730
731 Weight of sieve used (sieve no. 8) = 462g
732 Weight of sieve + retained aggregates = 543g
733 Weight retained = 543g – 462g = 81g
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

81𝑔
734 Percent retained = 𝑥100 = 12.24%
662𝑔

735 Cumulative percent retained = 12.69% + 12.24% = 24.93%

736 Percent passing = 100% - 24.93% = 75.07%
737
738 Table B.1

Weight
Weight of Sieve + Weight Percent Cumulative Percent
Sieve No. Sieve Retained Retained Retained Percent Passing
g Aggregates, g % Retained, % %
g
4 496 580 84 12.69 12.69 87.31
8 462 543 81 12.24 24.93 75.07
10 474 493 19 2.87 27.80 72.20
16 431 510 79 11.93 39.73 60.27
20 396 451 55 8.31 48.04 51.96
30 391 455 64 9.67 57.71 42.29
40 373 441 68 10.27 67.98 32.02
50 347 407 60 9.06 77.04 22.96
60 335 379 44 6.65 83.69 16.31
70 350 382 32 4.84 88.53 11.47
80 332 346 14 2.11 90.64 9.36
100 325 338 13 1.96 92.60 7.40
Pan 290 339 49 7.40 100 0
739
740 Total weight of sample fine aggregates = 662g
741 Fineness Modulus, FM = (Sum of % Retained on Sieve Nos. 4, 8, 16, 30, 50, 100) / 100
742 = (12.69+24.93+39.73+57.71+77.04+92.6) / 100
743 FM = 3.047
744 Conclusion:
745 Sieve analysis is one type of mechanical analysis which could determine the particle-size
746 distribution in a soil, sediment, or rock by measuring the percentage of the particles that will pass
747 through standard sieves of various sizes.
748 For this study, it is essential to determine the particle-size distribution of the aggregates since
749 it contributes in determining the performance of the aggregates when used in concrete. Having
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

750 contrast particle sizes of aggregates can possibly make the concrete denser, thus, making it stronger.
751 The value calculated for the fineness modulus was slightly large but was still included in the
752 considered values of fineness modulus.
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

784 Appendix C: Specific Gravity and Absorption of Fine Aggregate (FA) – ASTM C128
785
786 Materials and Equipment Used:
787 Balance Blower
788 Pycnometer Distilled Water
789 Oven Newspaper
790
791 Objectives:
792 To determine the specific gravity and water absorption of fine aggregates which are essential
793 for the calculation of the mix design of concrete.
794
795 Procedure:
796 1. The test sample was obtained through quartering method.
797 2. The test sample was covered with water by immersion and was permitted to stand for
798 24 ± 4h.
799 3. Excess water was carefully decanted. The sample was spread on a flat nonabsorbent surface
800 exposed to a gently moving current of warm air, and was stirred frequently to secure homogeneous
801 drying. It was continued until the sample approached a free-flowing condition. The specimen was
802 weighed when it has reached SSD (g).
803 4. The pycnometer was filled with water to the top, and was weighed: PYC (g)
804 5. Part of the water was removed, and the SSD sample was introduced into the pycnometer.
805 6. Additional water was filled to approximately 90% of its capacity.
806 7. The pycnometer was rolled, inverted, and agitated to eliminate all air bubbles.
807 8. The water level in the pycnometer was brought to its calibrated capacity.
808 9. The total weight of the pycnometer, specimen, and water was determined: SUB (g)
809 10. The sample from the pycnometer was removed, dried to constant weight at a temperature of
810 110±5° C, cooled, and weighed: OD(g)
811
812 Data and Calculation:
813 OD = 489.4g SSD = 500g
814 SUB = 1290g PYC = 996g
815
𝑂𝐷 489.4𝑔
816 Bulk Gs (Air Dry) = = = 2.38
𝑃𝑌𝐶+𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 996𝑔+500𝑔−1290𝑔
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

817
𝑆𝑆𝐷 500𝑔
818 Bulk Gs (SSD) = = = 2.43
𝑃𝑌𝐶+𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 996𝑔+500𝑔−1290𝑔

819
𝑂𝐷 489.4𝑔
820 Apparent Gs = = = 2.50
𝑃𝑌𝐶+𝑂𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 996𝑔+489.4𝑔−1290𝑔

821
𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑂𝐷 500𝑔−489.4𝑔
822 Absorption = = = 2.17%
𝑂𝐷 489.4𝑔

823
824 Conclusion:
825 Specific gravity is an essential property of an aggregate that is needed to determine its
826 appropriate volume which will be utilized in a concrete mix. Specific gravity is said to be the measure
827 of the strength or quality of a material thus, the greater value for bulk specific gravity was chosen
828 among the results. Turning the soaked aggregates to SSD condition was the hardest and time
829 consuming part of the experiment.
830 Water absorption is the capacity of the aggregates to absorb water. It is important to know the
831 absorption value of the aggregates because it will regulate the amount of water to be used in concrete
832 mixing. The obtained result was considered.
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

849 Appendix D: Unit Weight and Voids in Aggregate: Fine Aggregate (ASTM C29)
850 Materials:
851 Balance Measure
852 Tamping rod Scoop or shovel
853
854 Objectives:
855 To determine the bulk density and voids in fine aggregate
856
857 Procedure:
858 1. The sample size of the fine aggregate was taken through the quartering method.
859 2. Using the balance, the mass of the measure was taken and recorded.
860 Loose:
861 3. For the loose unit weight, the measure was filled to overflowing by means of a shovel or scoop,
862 discharging the aggregate from a height not to exceed 50 mm (2 in.) above the top of the measure.
863 4. The surface of the aggregate was leveled with a straightedge in such a way that any slight
864 projections of the larger pieces of the aggregate approximately balance the larger voids in the
865 surface below the top of the measure.
866 5. The mass of the measure plus contents was determined and recorded using the balance.
867 6. This was repeated for three trials.
868 Rodded:
869 7. The measure was filled to one-third and layer of aggregate was rodded with 25 strokes of the
870 tamping rod evenly distributed over the surface.
871 8. The measure was filled to two-third and was once again leveled and rodded as mentioned above.
872 9. Finally, the measure was filled to overflowing and was leveled with a straightedge in such a way
873 that any slight projections of the larger pieces of the aggregate approximately balance the larger
874 voids in the surface below the top of the measure.
875 10. The measure was then rodded in the manner previously mentioned.
876 11. The mass of the measure with the contents was taken using the balance and was recorded.
877 12. This was repeated for three trials.
878
879 Data and Calculation:
880 Measure:
881 Mass = 3435 g h = 14.986 cm
882 d = 15.494 cm V= 2.826 x 10 – 3 m3
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

883
884 Table D.1. Mass of measure + FA:
Trials Loose Rodded
1 7500 g 7877 g
2 7526 g 7880 g
3 7498 g 7893 g
Average 7508 g 7883 g
885
7508 𝑔 −3435 𝑔 𝑘𝑔
886 Unit Weight of FA (loose) = = 1441.5
2.826 𝑥 10−3 𝑚3 𝑚3
7883 𝑔 −3435 𝑔 𝑘𝑔
887 Unit Weight of FA (rodded) = = 1573.96
𝑚3
2.826 𝑥 10−3 𝑚3
888
889 Conclusion:
890 Bulk density of aggregate is the mass of a unit volume of bulk aggregate material. The
891 volume of the bulk aggregate material includes the volume of the individual particles and the volume
892 of the voids between the particles. It is expressed in kg/m3 (lb/ft3 ).
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

910 Appendix E: Moisture Content of Fine Aggregates

911 Materials and Equipment Used:
912 Balance
913 Oven
914
915 Objectives:
916 To determine the moisture content of fine aggregates used for the concrete samples.
917
918 Procedure:
919 1. Fine aggregates were thoroughly mixed.
920 2. Three samples were taken through the method of quartering. Then, each sample was weighed (AD,
921 g) and data was recorded.
922 3. Samples were oven dried overnight.
923 4. Samples were taken from the oven (OD, g) and were cooled down at room temperature.
924 5. The samples were weighed and the data was recorded.
925 6. The average result from the three samples was taken.
926
927 Data and Calculation:
Trials Air Dry (AD) Oven Dry (OD)
1 (weight of pan: 102g) 1250 g 1206 g
2 (weight of pan: 122g) 1898 g 1832 g
3 (weight of pan: 100g) 1422 g 1372 g
928
(𝐴𝐷)−(𝑂𝐷)
929 Moisture content (%) = 𝑥 100
𝑂𝐷
(1250𝑔−102𝑔)−(1206𝑔−102𝑔)
930 1st Trial = 𝑥 100 = 3.99%
(1206𝑔−102𝑔)
(1898𝑔−122𝑔)−(1832𝑔−122𝑔)
931 2nd Trial = 𝑥 100 = 3.86%
(1832𝑔−122𝑔)
(1422𝑔−100𝑔)−(1372𝑔−100𝑔)
932 3rd Trial = 𝑥 100 = 3.93%
(1372𝑔−100𝑔)
3.99%+3.86%+3.93%
933 Average MC =
3
= 3.93%

934
935 Conclusion:
936 Moisture content of fine aggregates was constant for all the concrete mixes. After getting
937 enough sample for this experiment, the total volume of fine aggregates was placed on plastics to
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

938 avoid the loss and gain of moisture. The moisture content obtained was positive hence, the aggregates
939 will contribute an amount of water to the mixture. The value of moisture content is very important as
940 it affects the calculation of the total volume of water to be used in concrete mixing.
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

970 Appendix F: Organic Impurities in Fine Aggregates

971
972 Materials:
973 Colorless glass bottle
974 NaOH solution
975
976 Objectives:
977 To classify the level of organic impurities in the fine aggregate
978
979 Procedure:
980 1. The glass bottle was filled to approximately 130-mL level with the sample of the fine aggregate
981 to be tested.
982 2. The sodium hydroxide solution was then added.
983 3. The bottle was shaken vigorously in a horizontal manner for one minute.
984 4. Then, the bottle was allowed to stand for 24 hours.
985 5. After 24 hours, the color of the solution was compared to the organic impurities color reference
986 chart to classify the level of impurity in the solution.
987
988 Data:

989 Figure F.1. Sample after 24 hours Figure F.2. Organic Impurities Color Reference Chart

990
991 Conclusion:
992 The principal value of this test method is to furnish a warning that injurious amounts of organic
993 impurities may be present. When a sample subjected to this test produces a color darker than the standard
994 color it is advisable to perform the test for the effect of organic impurities on the strength of mortar in
995 accordance with Test Method C 87.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

996 Appendix G: Specific Gravity and Absorption of Coarse Aggregates (ASTM C127)
997
998 Materials and Equipment Used:
999 Balance Water Tank
1000 Wire Basket Oven
1001
1002 Objectives:
1003 To determine the specific gravity and water absorption of coarse aggregates which are
1004 essential for the calculation of the mix design of concrete.
1005
1006 Procedure:
1007 1. The test sample was obtained through quartering method.
1008 2. The aggregates were immersed in water at room temperature for a period of 24±4h.
1009 3. The sample was removed from the water. It was rolled in a large absorbent cloth until all
1010 visible films of water were removed. The sample was in Saturated Surface Dry (SSD) condition.
1011 4. The sample was weighed and its SSD weight was obtained: SSD (g)
1012 5. The SSD sample was placed in the wire basket and its weight in water was determined: SUB (g)
1013 6. The sample was removed from the wire basket.
1014 7. The sample was dried to constant weight at a temperature of 110±5° C (≈ 24h.), and was
1015 weighed: OD (g)
1016 8. The specific gravities and absorption were calculated.
1017
1018 Data and Calculation:
1019 OD = 4895g SSD = 4999.1g
1020 SUB = 3125g
1021
𝑂𝐷 4895𝑔
1022 Bulk Gs (Air Dry) = = = 2.61
𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 4999.1𝑔−3125𝑔

1023
𝑆𝑆𝐷 4999.1𝑔
1024 Bulk Gs (SSD) = = = 2.67
𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 4999.1𝑔−3125𝑔

1025
𝑂𝐷 4895𝑔
1026 Apparent Gs = = = 2.77
𝑂𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 4895𝑔−3125𝑔

1027
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑂𝐷 4999.1𝑔−4895𝑔
1028 Absorption = = = 2.13%
𝑂𝐷 4895𝑔

1029
1030 Conclusion:
1031 Specific gravity is an essential property of an aggregate that is needed to determine its
1032 appropriate volume which will be utilized in a concrete mix. Specific gravity is said to be the measure
1033 of the strength or quality of a material thus, the greater value for bulk specific gravity was chosen
1034 among the results.
1035 Water absorption is the capacity of the aggregates to absorb water. It is important to know the
1036 absorption value of the aggregates because it will regulate the amount of water to be used in concrete
1037 mixing. The obtained result was considered.
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1062 Appendix H: Unit Weight and Voids in Aggregate: Coarse Aggregate (ASTM C29)
1063
1064 Materials:
1065 Balance Measure
1066 Tamping rod Scoop or shovel
1067
1068 Objectives:
1069 To determine the bulk density and voids in coarse aggregate
1070
1071 Procedure:
1072 1. The sample size of the fine aggregate was taken through the quartering method.
1073 2. Using the balance, the mass of the measure was taken and recorded.
1074 Loose:
1075 3. For the loose unit weight, the measure was filled to overflowing by means of a shovel or scoop,
1076 discharging the aggregate from a height not to exceed 50 mm (2 in.) above the top of the measure.
1077 4. The surface of the aggregate was leveled with a straightedge in such a way that any slight
1078 projections of the larger pieces of the aggregate approximately balance the larger voids in the
1079 surface below the top of the measure.
1080 5. The mass of the measure plus contents was determined and recorded using the balance.
1081 6. This was repeated for three trials.
1082 Rodded:
1083 7. The measure was filled to one-third and layer of aggregate was rodded with 25 strokes of the
1084 tamping rod evenly distributed over the surface.
1085 8. The measure was filled to two-third and was once again leveled and rodded as mentioned above.
1086 9. Finally, the measure was filled to overflowing and was leveled with a straightedge in such a way
1087 that any slight projections of the larger pieces of the aggregate approximately balance the larger
1088 voids in the surface below the top of the measure.
1089 10. The measure was then rodded in the manner previously mentioned.
1090 11. The mass of the measure with the contents was taken using the balance and was recorded.
1091 12. This was repeated for three trials.
1092
1093
1094
1095
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1096 Data and Calculation:

1097 Measure:
1098 Mass = 3435 g
1099 d = 15.494 cm
1100 h = 14.986 cm
1101 V= 2.826 x 10 – 3 m3
1102
1103 Table H.1. Mass of measure + CA:
Trials Loose Rodded
1 6854 g 7162 g
2 6756 g 7242 g
3 6892 g 7228 g
Average 6834 g 7210.7 g
1104
6834 𝑔 −3435 𝑔 𝑘𝑔
1105 Unit Weight of CA (loose) =
2.826 𝑥 10−3 𝑚3
= 1202.05
𝑚3

1106
7210.7 𝑔 −3435 𝑔 𝑘𝑔
1107 Unit Weight of CA (rodded) =
2.826 𝑥 10−3 𝑚3
= 1336.06
𝑚3

1108
1109 Conclusion:
1110 Bulk density of aggregate is the mass of a unit volume of bulk aggregate material. The
1111 volume of the bulk aggregate material includes the volume of the individual particles and the volume
1112 of the voids between the particles. It is expressed in kg/m3 (lb/ft3 ).
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1124 Appendix I: Moisture Content of Coarse Aggregates

1125
1126 Materials and Equipment Used:
1127 Balance
1128 Oven
1129
1130 Objectives:
1131 To determine the moisture content of coarse aggregates used for the concrete samples.
1132
1133 Procedure:
1134 1. Coarse aggregates were thoroughly mixed.
1135 2. Three samples were taken through the method of quartering. Then, each sample was weighed
1136 (AD, g) and the data was recorded.
1137 3. Samples were oven dried overnight.
1138 4. Samples were taken from the oven (OD, g) and were cooled down at room temperature.
1139 5. The samples were weighed and the data was recorded.
1140 6. The average result from the three samples was taken.
1141
1142 Data and Calculation:
1143
Trials Air Dry (AD) Oven Dry (OD)
1 (weight of pan: 122g) 2152 g 2118 g
2 (weight of pan: 96g) 1674 g 1648 g
3 (weight of pan: 90g) 1402 g 1382 g
1144
(𝐴𝐷)−(𝑂𝐷)
1145 Moisture content (%) = 𝑥 100
𝑂𝐷
(2152𝑔−122𝑔)−(2118𝑔−122𝑔)
1146 1st Trial = 𝑥 100 = 1.703%
(2118𝑔−122𝑔)
(1674𝑔−96𝑔)−(1648𝑔−96𝑔)
1147 2nd Trial = 𝑥 100 = 1.675%
(1648𝑔−96𝑔)
(1402𝑔−90𝑔)−(1382𝑔−90𝑔)
1148 3rd Trial = 𝑥 100 = 1.548%
(1382𝑔−90𝑔)
1.703%+1.675%+1.548%
1149 Average MC =
3
= 1.642%

1150
1151
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1152 Conclusion:
1153 Moisture content of coarse aggregates was constant for all the concrete mixes. After getting enough
1154 sample for this experiment, the total volume of coarse aggregates was placed on plastics to avoid the loss and
1155 gain of moisture. The moisture content obtained was positive hence, the aggregates will contribute an amount
1156 of water to the mixture. The value of moisture content is very important as it affects the calculation of the
1157 total volume of water to be used in concrete mixing.
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1186 Appendix J: Specific Gravity of Coal Fly Ash (ASTM C188)

1187 Materials and Equipment Used:
1188 Le Chatelier flask
1189 Kerosene
1190
1191 Objectives:
1192 To determine the density of the hydraulic cement by volume displacement
1193
1194 Procedure:
1195 1. The flask was filled with kerosene to a point on the stem between the 0 and 1-mL mark. The first
1196 volume reading was recorded.
1197 2. A quantity of coal fly ash weighing 50 g was introduced. This was done making sure that the coal
1198 fly ash does not adhere to the inside of the flask above the liquid.
1199 3. The volume reading after the fly ash was introduced was taken. This was recorded as the second
1200 reading.
1201 4. The process was repeated for three trials.
1202
1203 Data and Calculation:
1204 Table J.1.
Mass of 1st reading 2nd reading Volume
Density Specific
TRIAL Coal Fly Volume Volume difference
(g/mL) Gravity
Ash(g) (mL) (mL) (mL)
1 50 0.7 18.7 18.0 2.778 2.778
2 50 0.7 19.5 18.8 2.660 2.660
3 50 0.7 20.0 19.3 2.591 2.591
Average 2.676
1205
(2.778+2.660+2.591)
1206 SG Ave. =
3
= 2.676

1207 Conclusion:
1208 Fly ash consists of fine, powdery particles that are predominantly spherical in shape,
1209 eithervsolid or hollow, and mostly glassy (amorphous) in nature. The specific gravity of fly ash
1210 usually ranges from 2.1 to 3.0. Here in our experiment, the coal fly ash has a specific gravity of
1211 approximately 2.676.
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1212 Appendix K: Specific Gravity and Absorption of Coconut Shells (ASTM C127)
1213 Materials and Equipment Used:
1214 Balance Water Tank
1215 Wire Basket Oven
1216
1217 Objectives:
1218 To determine the specific gravity and water absorption of coconut shells which are essential
1219 for the calculation of the mix design of concrete.
1220
1221 Procedure:
1222 1. The test sample was obtained through quartering method.
1223 2. The aggregates were immersed in water at room temperature for a period of 24±4h.
1224 3. The sample was removed from the water. It was rolled in a large absorbent cloth until all
1225 visible films of water were removed. The sample was in Saturated Surface Dry (SSD) condition.
1226 4. The sample was weighed and its SSD weight was obtained: SSD (g)
1227 5. The SSD sample was placed in the wire basket and its weight in water was determined: SUB (g)
1228 6. The sample was removed from the wire basket.
1229 7. The sample was dried to constant weight at a temperature of 110±5° C (≈ 24h.), and was
1230 weighed: OD (g)
1231 8. The specific gravities and absorption were calculated.
1232
1233 Data and Calculation:
1234 OD = 4762g SSD = 5519g SUB = 1241g
𝑂𝐷 4762𝑔
1235 Bulk Gs (Air Dry) = = = 1.11
𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 5519𝑔−1241𝑔

1236
𝑆𝑆𝐷 5519𝑔
1237 Bulk Gs (SSD) = = = 1.29
𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 5519𝑔−1241𝑔

1238
𝑂𝐷 4762𝑔
1239 Apparent Gs = = = 1.35
𝑂𝐷−𝑆𝑈𝐵 4762𝑔−1241𝑔

1240
𝑆𝑆𝐷−𝑂𝐷 5519𝑔−4762𝑔
1241 Absorption = = = 15.9%
𝑂𝐷 4762𝑔

1242
1243
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1244 Conclusion:
1245 Specific gravity is an essential property of an aggregate that is needed to determine its
1246 appropriate volume which will be utilized in a concrete mix. Specific gravity is said to be the measure
1247 of the strength or quality of a material thus, the greater value for bulk specific gravity was chosen
1248 among the results.
1249 Water absorption is the capacity of the aggregates to absorb water. It is important to know the
1250 absorption value of the aggregates because it will regulate the amount of water to be used in concrete
1251 mixing. From the obtained results, the value of water absorption for coconut shells was greater than
1252 the coarse aggregates. The obtained result was considered.
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1278 Appendix L: Unit Weight and Voids in Aggregate: Coconut Shells (ASTM C29)
1279 Materials:
1280 Balance Measure
1281 Tamping rod Scoop or shovel
1282
1283 Objectives:
1284 To determine the bulk density and voids in coarse aggregate
1285
1286 Procedure:
1287 1. The sample size of the fine aggregate was taken through the quartering method.
1288 2. Using the balance, the mass of the measure was taken and recorded.
1289 Loose:
1290 3. For the loose unit weight, the measure was filled to overflowing by means of a shovel or scoop,
1291 discharging the aggregate from a height not to exceed 50 mm (2 in.) above the top of the
1292 measure.
1293 4. The surface of the aggregate was leveled with a straightedge in such a way that any slight
1294 projections of the larger pieces of the aggregate approximately balance the larger voids in the
1295 surface below the top of the measure.
1296 5. The mass of the measure plus contents was determined and recorded using the balance.
1297 6. This was repeated for three trials.
1298 Rodded:
1299 7. The measure was filled to one-third and layer of aggregate was rodded with 25 strokes of the
1300 tamping rod evenly distributed over the surface.
1301 8. The measure was filled to two-third and was once again leveled and rodded as mentioned above.
1302 9. Finally, the measure was filled to overflowing and was leveled with a straightedge in such a way
1303 that any slight projections of the larger pieces of the aggregate approximately balance the larger
1304 voids in the surface below the top of the measure.
1305 10. The measure was then rodded in the manner previously mentioned.
1306 11. The mass of the measure with the contents was taken using the balance and was recorded.
1307 12. This was repeated for three trials.
1308
1309
1310
1311
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1312 Data and Calculation:

1313 Measure:
1314 Mass = 3435 g d = 15.494 cm h = 14.986 cm V= 2.826 x 10 – 3 m3
1315 Table K.1. Mass of measure + CS:
Trials Loose Rodded
1 4832 g 5051 g
2 4832 g 5045 g
3 4829 g 5032 g
Average 4831 g 5043 g
1316
4831 𝑔 −3435 𝑔 𝑘𝑔
1317 Unit Weight of CS (loose) =
2.826 𝑥 10−3 𝑚3
= 494
𝑚3

1318
5043 𝑔 −3435 𝑔 𝑘𝑔
1319 Unit Weight of CS (rodded) =
2.826 𝑥 10−3 𝑚3
= 569
𝑚3

1320
1321 Conclusion:
1322 Bulk density of aggregate is the mass of a unit volume of bulk aggregate material. The
1323 volume of the bulk aggregate material includes the volume of the individual particles and the volume
1324 of the voids between the particles. It is expressed in kg/m3 (lb/ft3 ).
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1339 Appendix M: Mix Design Calculation

1340
1341 Required Material Information
1342 Fineness Modulus = 3.0
1343 Specific Gravity of Cement = 3.15
1344 Specific Gravity of Fly Ash = 2.676
1345 Specific Gravity of Sand (dry) = 2.43
1346 Specific Gravity of Gravel (dry) = 2.67
1347 Specific Gravity of Coconut Shells (dry) = 1.29
𝑙𝑏
1348 Dry Rodded Unit Weight of Gravel = 104.1
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑘𝑔
1349 Dry Rodded Unit Weight of Coconut Shells = 569
𝑚3
𝑙𝑏
1350 Unit Weight of Water = 62.4
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑙𝑏
1351 Unit Weight of Gravel = 4,498
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑙𝑏
1352 Unit Weight of Sand = 4,094
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑙𝑏
1353 Unit Weight of Coconut Shells = 2,173
𝑓𝑡 3
𝑙𝑏 𝑘𝑔
1354 Unit Weight of Fly Ash = 2.676 (62.4 ) = 99.067
𝑓𝑡 3 𝑚3

1355 Water Absorption of Gravel = 2.13 %

1356 Water Absorption of Sand = 2.17 %
1357 Water Absorption of Coconut Shells = 15.90 %
1358 Moisture Content of Gravel = 1.64 %
1359 Moisture Content of Sand = 3.93 %
1360
1361 Solution:
1362 1. Choice of slump
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1370 Slump = 4 inches

1371 2. Maximum aggregates size
1372 Maximum Gravel Size = 0.75 inches
1373 3. Estimation of mixing water and air content
𝑙𝑏
1374 Approximate mixing water ( 3 ) and air content for different slumps and nominal
𝑦𝑑

1375 maximum sizes of aggregates.

1376
1377
1378
1379
1380
𝑙𝑏
1381 Weight of Water = 340
𝑦𝑑 3

1382 Air content = 2.0%

1383
1384 4. Water/ cement ratio
1385
1386
1387
1388
1389
1390
1391
1392 Design Strength = 4,000 psi
1393 Water/ Cement Ratio = 0.57
1394
1395 5. Calculation of cement content
𝑙𝑏
340
𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑑3 𝑙𝑏
1396 Cement = 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝐶𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = 0.57
= 596.491 3
𝑦𝑑

1397
1398
1399
1400
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

1401 6. Estimation of coarse aggregates content

1402
1403
1404
1405
1406
1407
𝑓𝑡 3
1408 Weight of GravelOD = 0.60 (27 ) (𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙)
𝑦𝑑 3

𝑓𝑡 3 𝑙𝑏
1409 = 0.60 (27 ) (104.1 )
𝑦𝑑 3 𝑓𝑡 3
𝑙𝑏
1410 = 1,686 3
𝑦𝑑

1411 7. Estimation of fine aggregate content

𝑙𝑏
340 3
𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑑3 𝑓𝑡
1412 Volume of Water = 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
= 𝑙𝑏 = 5.449 3
62.4 3 𝑦𝑑
𝑓𝑡

𝑙𝑏
596.491 3
𝐶𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑦𝑑3 𝑓𝑡
1413 Volume of Cement = 𝑆𝐺𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 (𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
= 𝑙𝑏 = 3.035 3
3.15(62.4 3 ) 𝑦𝑑
𝑓𝑡

𝑙𝑏
1,686 3
𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑂𝐷 𝑦𝑑3 𝑓𝑡
1414 Volume of Gravel = 𝑆𝐺𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙 (𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
= 𝑙𝑏 = 10.122 3
2.67(62.4 3 ) 𝑦𝑑
𝑓𝑡

𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3
1415 Volume of Air = 𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 (27 ) = 2.0% (27 ) = 0.54
𝑦𝑑 3 𝑦𝑑 3 𝑦𝑑 3

𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3
1416 Total Volume = 5.449 3 + 3.035 3 + 10.122 3 + 0.54 = 19.145
𝑦𝑑 𝑦𝑑 𝑦𝑑 𝑦𝑑 3 𝑦𝑑 3

1417 Therefore, the fine aggregates must occupy a volume of:

𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3 𝑓𝑡 3
1418 Volume of Sand = 27 + 19.145 = 7.855
𝑦𝑑 3 𝑦𝑑 3 𝑦𝑑 3

1419 The OD weight of fine aggregates

1420 Weight of SandOD = 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑑(𝑆𝐺𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑑 )(𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
𝑓𝑡 3 𝑙𝑏
1421 = 7.855 (2.43)(62.4 )
𝑦𝑑 3 𝑓𝑡 3
𝑙𝑏
1422 = 1,191 3
𝑦𝑑

1423 8. Adjustment of aggregates and water content

1424 Weight of Gravel = Weight of GravelOD (1 + Moisture Content of Gravel)
𝑙𝑏
1425 = 1,686 3 ( 1 + 1.64 %)
𝑦𝑑
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

𝑙𝑏
1426 = 1,714 3
𝑦𝑑

1427 Weight of Sand = Weight of SandOD ( 1+ Moisture Content of Sand)

𝑙𝑏
1428 = 1,191 3 ( 1 + 3.93 %)
𝑦𝑑
𝑙𝑏
1429 = 1,238 3
𝑦𝑑

1430 Adjusted Water = Weight of Water – Weight of SandOD (Moisture Content of Sand
1431 – Absorption of Sand) – Weight of GravelOD (Moisture Content
1432 of Gravel – Absorption of Gravel)
𝑙𝑏 𝑙𝑏 𝑙𝑏
1433 = 340
𝑦𝑑 3
- 1,191 3 (3.93% - 2.17%) - 1,686 3 (1.64% - 2.13 %)
𝑦𝑑 𝑦𝑑
𝑙𝑏
1434 = 327.976 3
𝑦𝑑

1435 9. Estimated batch weight per 𝒚𝒅𝟑

𝑙𝑏 𝑘𝑔
1436 Adjusted Water = 327.976 3 = 194.581 𝑚3
𝑦𝑑
𝑙𝑏 𝑘𝑔
1437 Weight of Cement = 596.491 3 = 353.884 𝑚3
𝑦𝑑
𝑙𝑏 𝑘𝑔
1438 Weight of Gravel = 1,714 3 = 1,017 𝑚3
𝑦𝑑
𝑙𝑏 𝑘𝑔
1439 Weight of Sand = 1,238 3 = 734.362 𝑚3
𝑦𝑑

1440 Design Mixes

1441 Volume per batch = 0.04 m3
1442 Design Mix 1 Ratio
𝑘𝑔
1443 C1 = Weight of Cement (Volume per batch) = 353.884 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 14.155 kg
𝑘𝑔
1444 S1 = Weight of Sand (Volume per batch) = 734.362 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 29.374 kg
𝑘𝑔
1445 G1 = Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch) = 1,017 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 40.677 kg
𝑘𝑔
1446 W1 = Adjusted Water (Volume per batch) = 194.581 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 7.783 kg
1447
1448 Design Mix 2 Ratio
𝑘𝑔
1449 C2 = Weight of Cement (Volume per batch) = 353.884 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 14.155 kg
𝑘𝑔
1450 S2 = Weight of Sand (Volume per batch) = 734.362 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 29.374 kg
𝑘𝑔
1451 G2 = Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(90%) = 1,017 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) (90%) = 36.609 kg
Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(10%)
1452 CS2 = 𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙
(𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑡 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠)
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

𝑘𝑔
1,017 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(10%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1453 = 𝑙𝑏 (569 𝑚3
)
104.1 3
𝑓𝑡

1454 = 1.388 kg
𝑘𝑔
1455 W2 = Adjusted Water (Volume per batch) = 194.581 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 7.783 kg

1456
1457 Design Mix 3 Ratio
𝑘𝑔
1458 C3 = Weight of Cement (Volume per batch) = 353.884 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 14.155 kg
𝑘𝑔
1459 S3 = Weight of Sand (Volume per batch) = 734.362 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 29.374 kg
𝑘𝑔
1460 G3 = Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(80%) = 1,017 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) (80%) = 32.541 kg
Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(10%)
1461 CS3 = 𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙
(𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑡 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠)
𝑘𝑔
1,017 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(10%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1462 = 𝑙𝑏 (569 𝑚3
)
104.1 3
𝑓𝑡

1463 = 2.776 kg
𝑘𝑔
1464 W3 = Adjusted Water (Volume per batch) = 194.581 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 7.783 kg
1465
1466 Design Mix 4 Ratio
𝑘𝑔
1467 C4 = Weight of Cement (Volume per batch)(90%) = 353.884 𝑚3 (0.04 m3)(90%) = 12.740 kg
Weight of Cement (Volume per batch)(10%)
1468 FA4 = 𝑆𝐺𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
(𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐹𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑠ℎ)
𝑘𝑔
353.884 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(10%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1469 = 𝑙𝑏 (99.067 𝑚3
)
3.15(62.4 3 )
𝑓𝑡

1470 = 1.203 kg
𝑘𝑔
1471 S4 = Weight of Sand (Volume per batch) = 734.362 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 29.374 kg
𝑘𝑔
1472 G4 = Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(80%) = 1,017 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) (80%) = 32.541 kg
Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(10%)
1473 CS4 = 𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙
(𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑡 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠)
𝑘𝑔
1,017 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(10%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1474 = 𝑙𝑏 (569 𝑚3
)
104.1 3
𝑓𝑡

1475 = 2.776 kg
𝑘𝑔
1476 W4 = Adjusted Water (Volume per batch) = 194.581 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 7.783 kg
1477
1478 Design Mix 5 Ratio
 University of San Carlos – Department of Civil Engineering
CE 521G FORM-1-Undergraduate Research Paper Template v2017-1

𝑘𝑔
1479 C5 = Weight of Cement (Volume per batch)(80%) = 353.884 𝑚3 (0.04 m3)(80%) = 11.324 kg
Weight of Cement (Volume per batch)(20%)
1480 FA5 = 𝑆𝐺𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
(𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐹𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑠ℎ)
𝑘𝑔
353.884 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(20%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1481 = 𝑙𝑏 (99.067 𝑚3
)
3.15(62.4 3 )
𝑓𝑡

1482 = 2.405 kg
𝑘𝑔
1483 S5 = Weight of Sand (Volume per batch) = 734.362 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 29.374 kg
𝑘𝑔
1484 G5 = Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(80%) = 1,017 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) (80%) = 32.541 kg
1485
Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(10%)
1486 CS5 = 𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙
(𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑡 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠)
𝑘𝑔
1,017 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(10%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1487 = 𝑙𝑏 (569 𝑚3
)
104.1 3
𝑓𝑡

1488 = 2.776 kg
𝑘𝑔
1489 W5 = Adjusted Water (Volume per batch) = 194.581 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 7.783 kg
1490
1491 Design Mix 6 Ratio
𝑘𝑔
1492 C6 = Weight of Cement (Volume per batch)(70%) = 353.884 𝑚3 (0.04 m3)(70%) = 9.909 kg
Weight of Cement (Volume per batch)(30%)
1493 FA6 = 𝑆𝐺𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)
(𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐹𝑙𝑦 𝐴𝑠ℎ)
𝑘𝑔
353.884 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(30%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1494 = 𝑙𝑏 (99.067 𝑚3
)
3.15(62.4 3 )
𝑓𝑡

1495 = 3.608 kg
𝑘𝑔
1496 S6 = Weight of Sand (Volume per batch) = 734.362 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 29.374 kg
𝑘𝑔
1497 G6 = Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(80%) = 1,017 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) (80%) = 32.541 kg
Weight of Gravel (Volume per batch)(10%)
1498 CS6 = 𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙
(𝐷𝑟𝑦 𝑅𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑢𝑡 𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑠)
𝑘𝑔
1,017 3 (0.04 𝑚3 )(10%) 𝑘𝑔
𝑚
1499 = 𝑙𝑏 (569 𝑚3
)
104.1 3
𝑓𝑡

1500 = 2.776 kg
𝑘𝑔
1501 W6 = Adjusted Water (Volume per batch) = 194.581 𝑚3 (0.04 m3) = 7.783 kg

1502
1503
1504